Discussion on:

Stop freaking out about the Windows 8 interface

Microsoft is listening to the users and the IT pros that support them when it comes to the Windows 8 interface. You can help them make better decisions by explain clearly and concisely what you would like to see the Windows 8 Metro Interface do and not do. This is your time to shine. What do you want and what do you not want?

Might as well just have icons on your desktop.

I have avoided using desktop icons - I prefer the taskbar. I'm not sure I can embrace this new model. It is good for a tablet with a touch display, but not for a desktop PC - at least, I am not convinced that it is yet.

It would be kinda ridiculous to see people freak out whenever they see a brand new Lamborghini on their drive lot wouldn't it? Then why so called "It Pros" freak out when all that Metro UI is in desktop environment is just a much natural evolution of very outdated 95 Start Menu? Of course in tablet environment Metro UI "Start Screen" will become the primary interface but in Desktop UI it will just be a buffed up Start Menu and that's it! No tricks here!

Every Lamborghini (start menu) is the same, fast and reliable. Windows just replaced their Lambo (95 start menu) with a Hummer (start screen); it fits a lot, looks awesome, but is really really really really really big. As much as I hate to see the famous start menu go, i do want to try out this start screen.

I don't want a Lamborghini; it doesn't do what I want. It's expensive to fuel and insure, and has no trunk space for two weeks of groceris or few bales of pine straw. That's the kind of driving I do daily.

One person's dream car upgrade is another's unwanted annoyance. Ditto user interfaces. Metro may be a dream on a portable device, like a Lambo on the open road. So far it looks like cumbersome on a desktop, like a vehicle optimized for different conditions.

You don't need Windows 8 Metro edition, but country edition

just ask yourself: how many people buy a Lamborghini compared to how many people don't? lol

Lamborghini's are very flashy, showy, and expensive, but for the average driver (IT pro) it is very unnecessary. I think its great for end users, but they need to do more for the people that do all their work deep in the OS and not just improve the end-user interface.

The changes being talked about aren't the kind of changes you see in a new model Lamborghini. Those car model changes, like body style, doors, etc. are like using a picture instead of the word start on the start menu. The kind of changes M/S is making are more like replacing the gas pedal with a lever on the console, or using an airplane style stick instead of a steering wheel.

I would go buy a Porsche or from someone else that will allow me to buy what I want.

I could be way off and I admit as much but it very well could be the choice to go with a more tablet friendly interface was made because the bigger and long term plan (the plan yet to be revealed to the public) involves a fastto semi-fast phase out of all non-tablet like devices. If MS knows that the 5-10 year plan (amongst the tech sector)isto move entirely away from the traditional desktop (or portable) PC then deciding to move forward as if there will be mainly tablet devices only would be logical albeit highly non-customer friendly and arrogant. It however would notbe the first time the user friendly was abandoned for the future tech. Many a user is still unhappy with the whole Ribbon design being pushed down users throats.

"Based on has often been very intense and passionate feedback, Microsoft has made a few changes to the Windows 8 Metro Interface. ... At this point, there is a significant amount of flexibility in the overall approach and they are listening to your concerns, so be as descriptive as you can when presenting your ideas."

It sounds like our 'freaking out' is accomplishing what we want - letting MS know what we want changed before W8 goes to final release.

Get your freak on, baby! Freak on!

You (Palmetto) have not been freaking out - your responses have be rational concerns and constructive.

But there has been some "freaking out" and declarations of "evil" intent and proclamations of preemptive operating system jumping that I find somewhat amusing.

As far as I can tell, Microsoft is still trying to figure out how the interface will be presented and I think they are looking for some actionable feedback.

I gotta do a better job of panicking. Maybe if I up my caffeine intake, sleep less, and quit taking the blood pressure medication? Is that how Jason does it?

I've been as vocal as most about what I don't like. For all that, I do know it's an early, preliminary release. But it's like looking at a concept car and finding the steering wheel on the opposite side, and in the trunk to boot. (HA! Get it? See what I did there?) I can't help but wonder, "Who thought this was a good idea?"

I'll check the development blog over the weekend. However, it may be like the Ribbon. Just knowing why they did something doesn't mean people are going to like it any better.

don't quit the blood pressure medication, hehe! That can throw your
system way off...blood pressure spikes, heart palpitations, sweats...
Anyway, if Microsoft is listening to feedback, that's a good thing!
Keep feeding them!
Disclaimer...my medical advice is offered without knowing what your
medications are...but hey, you probably knew not to stop taking them!
Anyway...hmmm...if I weren't so busy at work, I could answer a few
questions from TR members??? Oh well, maybe in the future.
{;-)

What if the start screen was like the start button? So you have a blank desktop, nice and clean. Then you have a taskbar with a button that may or may not say start on it. Instead of the start menu you get a screen that slides out of the taskbar kinda like the app drawer on android. You could even get rid of the button and just use a gesture to grab the whole taskbar and slide it up. This screen is customizable in how many tiles it shows and how application groups are organized. You can pull it up and down (or left to right) to show or hide the active programs vs. the widgets and tiles. Put a hotkey on it and now you can be working in your program and then slide up the start screen to check time, date and stock ticker. Slide it back and go back to work.

You can take the start menu but don't touch my taskbar. I like to see what is running and quickly move between them. I also like the clock... and the system tray. Ain't broke don't fix.

I want my clock and date. I want the icon for my virtual desktop app. I want the speaker volume icon too. I want the icon for my A/V so I know it's doing its thing; it's my security blankie.

And I want an Oompa-Loompa, Daddy! And a goose that lays golden eggs! And a chocolate river! And I want them now, Daddy! NOW!

That's all I need.

And these matches.

I don't want a virtual desktop app at all. The UI should support that functionality by default which should make it less quirky than any of the apps that I have tried which try to implement this ability. Windows is the only operating system I have used in the last decade that cannot deal with virtual desktops.

since it hasn't been, third-party apps have been the only option. You're right; there are some truly flaky ones out there. I've had great results in XP, V, and W7 with the freeware VirtuaWin and Dexpot apps. If you haven't given them a try, they're worth a look.

MS has a long history of screwing up what perfectly works. Proof: Vista ! Why on earth would MS duplicate the desktop. Running Win 7 - while maybe not perfect - it is working. So leave it alone !!!

How could Microsoft continue to make money if the actually produced successful, working software? What they ought to do is charge annual subscriptions as opposed to creating "new" software. How much money could they have already made on XP by now?

Based on your analysis one has to wonder just how Microsoft/Apple/IBM/Dell/HP/etc. were/are/continue to be the biggest businesses of their kind.

They read your mind. Take a look at Office 2010. MS has started "sneaking" out virtualized Office running from their servers at users homes (bad model). They also have started with Office 365 as a subscription service.

And take a look at the Office EULA / MSL. You don't own the software, you just lease it. They can deactivate it at any time.

Minor quibble - as regards ownership, Microsoft's EULA is no different from the overwhelming majority of software vendors. You don't own AutoCAD, Photoshop, or WoW either.

Nope, I am not upgrading to Windows 8 with that clunky interface. They either give us a choice or I am staying with Windows 7 just like I stayed with Windows XP and skipped Vista entirely. Oh and I just tried Ubuntu 11.10...equally pathetic.

A) You have a choice. The Start Screen is optional.
B) Did you read the article? This is a pre-beta release. 'That' interface is going to change a lot before it is released to the public.
C) Did you even read the article title? I think it was intended for you.

Why does the author or CNET care if I choose to upgrade or not? Vested interest?

My biggest problem with the developers preview was the clumsy and downright ugly way they handled the traditional Windows environment. The start button went from an aesthetically pleasing button to a button that fits the Metro interface but not the Windows 7/Vista style interface.

I also try to keep as little on my desktop as possible, not always succeeding I admit, but that statement should say a lot about how I use my computer. To me the start menu is not something you can just toss out via claims of innovation. If you are trying to cater to the users of old Windows then give them a functioning upgrade to it within the desktop environment. Don't go halfway and make the start button launch Metro again. That's not what it's for, and old Windows users may be a a loss when it comes to quickly accessing their programs.

My excitement for Windows 8 was minimal at start. I don't want a tablet UI on my desktop. Metro, as it is, is not a Desktop OS, I thought. Then I tried it. My worst fears were confirmed. Metro was annoying, different, and worse: it removed my start menu. The menu I spent most of my time using, effectively crippling its traditional style UI.

I have no plans to move to Windows 8, nor Windows 9 unless they drop Metro and return me my productive Windows environment, but here's an idea Microsoft, that probably is one you've heard before, but perhaps the more people saying it will make you listen:

Ask us.

When Windows 8 is installing have it ask us which environment we want. Let that environment take priority. If we choose for a Windows environment instead of Metro then give us a full Windows environment! Including my darn Start Menu!

An honest difference of opinion is now "freaking out?" I've made my distaste for "Metro" known in other posts so I won't rehash it all here.

I don't like anything full screen (except the odd spreadsheet and only then out of necessity). This is just another attempt by MS to hide the guts of the OS from users. Yes, they can still get there, but it takes more effort. That picture you have there is hideous. It seems that MS is lowering the grade level requirement for interfaces yet again. Congratulations, they have reached Kindergarten.

I have several windows open at once and want to move between them with ease. Metro makes that more difficult.

I know you can get to the desktop (I have the Preview), but it loses the enhancements when you disable Metro.

If you want to use it, more power to you. It is probably the best for tablets and smart phones (I have neither), but it is not a good interface for desktops and laptops. I want the choice. Is that too much to ask?

And, given MS's penchant for not listening to its customers, the earlier and louder you yell, the better. Maybe it will sink in while it's early enough to make changes without a lot of effort.

I've used MS's OSs since DOS 2.1 and am not about to change. I try Linux every now and then, but always end up back with Windows. I'm not going to knee-jerk and say I'm running to Linux or something else because of Metro. I'll download the final version when it's available (I have an MSDN subscription) and use it, but in "Desktop" mode. I want them to listen to me and others like me and make both options available so I can choose the one I want and make them both equal in stature (i.e.; nothing disabled in either interface).

OK, so I'm new to this supposed argument and haven't seen the rest of your posts so I'd like to address a singular point of your comment.

You say " It seems that MS is lowering the grade level requirement for interfaces yet again. Congratulations, they have reached Kindergarten." I realise you're being sarcastic but regardless I'd like to suggest that this may not be a bad thing.

If we lower the skill and understanding requirements we get our kids and our Technophobes using computers and other technology. This increase and diversity in the user base will, in turn, feed the industry with new money and innovation. That means more services and such for us so called 'power-users' too.

Don't believe me? Let me cite two very big examples where exactly this has happened:
1) The iPod. I have been a quick adopter of portable music innovation. I had perculiar tape based walkmans, early CD players, MiniDisc, NetMD, early MP3 players (both HDD and flash based) right up until the modern day (where I'm a very satisfied user of Sony's MP3 players and my Android devices). Once MiniDisc and MP3 hit this cycle it's been difficult to get CD users to understand music on the go. Understanding 'ripping' and transfer of data to the device wasn't easy for most people and navigating menus for people used to 'insert disc, press play, skip track' simply was alien. Then along comes Apple and the iPod starts a user revolution by lowering the technical ability required to use, purchase and transfer music. Now look at us - most people use MP3s and the iPod has become the generic name for any brand of MP3 player (true example - I show off my Sony player to my work mates and they say 'That's a nice iPod. Who makes that one?')

2) The Wii. I'm an avid gamer and have owned most major consoles since the Sega Master system. I started on the C64 and even have an Atari 2600 somewhere about the house and have tried to get many, many people into gaming over the years so I feel qualified to say that console gaming was very difficult for the older and younger generations to access before Nintendo launched the Wii.
Now, I'm no Wii lover. I hate the way it's games feel rushed and produced for the lowest common denominator (with a few exceptions. Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, MarioKart, Skyward Sword being a few) but even a critic like me has to admit that the Wii's lower entry requirements (less buttons, simple point-and-press UI) has expanded the gamer user-base and led to further innovations (in particular Kinect, Social gaming, Casual games and such). Some of these 'low entry gamers' have migrated to mainstream gaming, putting more money into 'normal' game titles and feeding software houses with cash to produce better games for us mainstream gamers. I may not like the 'lower barrier of entry' Wii, but I'm glad it's there because it makes my life as a gamer better.

I'll stop now, I'm sure I've made my point. To my mind a lower barrier of entry means more users which in turn feeds the innovations we as mainstream and power users want to see. I say lower the barrier and get people in to the wonderful world of computing.....but leave power users their tools and toys whenever you can.

The iPod and Wii are basically single-use devices. The more you simplify a desktop interface, the more you restrict the features of it's applications. For example, I couldn't find a way in Metro to display multiple applications side by side at the same time. Sure, I could have them running in the background (or at least open, since they weren't actually 'running'), but it was one full-screen app displayed at a time.

Your contention that it is still early, so there is no need to freak. Sorry, right idea, wrong conclusion.
Along with a few other commenters, I take the opposite position. It is still early, now is the time to MAXIMIZE your FREAKOUT reaction to the abortion known as the Metro UI.

Let me qualify that. I can see the logic of the metro design for tiny-screen hand-held devices. It does make sense to make the "start menu" bigger, easier to use on those devices. I absolutely HATE it for a 24 inch, extremely HIGH RESOLUTION CRT monitor, mouse and keyboard driven desktop. I either have to tweak my mouse so that the smallest twitch drives the pointer a long way across the screen or I have to pick up and reset the mouse many times to reach from one side to the other!

Metro is a repeat of the Office Ribbon abortion. They designed it for new users, the absolutely lowest-common denominator, ignoring people who have 20+ years of PAINFUL experience with the evolution of the current Windows desktop, Start menu and Menu applications environment. By the time the general public saw the Ribbon, in the public beta (less than a year before GA), it was WAY too late to get MS to make any significant changes, like adding a menu option back into the apps.

As a professional software developer I know that EARLY, aka NOW, is the ONLY time to maximize our "Freak"! Every study on software development and "bug fixing" makes it clear that the later in the development process a change the more expensive it becomes. And the relationship is not linear. The EARLIER in the design and build process that a significant change is requested, the EASIER and CHEAPER to do, and the more likely that it will happen. NOW is absolutely the best time to freak!

We have to freak, because as individuals as far as MS is concerned we have the voice and power of fleas. It takes a lot of fleas to get the attention of a brontosaurus like MS. We need the Presidents and CIOs of the Top 100, even the Top 500 businesses in the US to get on the band wagon with us. We need government CIO's to get onto the band wagon with us. We need the leaders of any large NGO to join in. They are the only buyers with clout that MS will listen to when they say that the cost of LOST PRODUCTIVITY, help desk support calls and business user retraining is way too HIGH.

If MS doesn't want to make it the default UI, fine.
If they want to make it an optional installation item, fine.
Heck, even if they make it a totally separate, optional download from the MS website item, fine.

But they MUST provide relatively easy access to that sort of backwards compatibility. That is one of the things that previously always impressed me. The backwards compatibility that MS built in to it's apps. Heck, CTL-C goes back to software built in the late 1970's and early 1980's! But starting with the Ribbon Gooey fiasco they seem to have forgotten that basic point of user friendliness. Don't alienate your long time, 'expert' users by pulling the user-interface "carpet from under their feet"!

I see what you're saying and to a degree I sympathise but while I agree that early protest on the current MetroUI is a good thing, freaking out isn't. I won't repeat my other comments on this thread here but the sort of froth and bluster we're seeing won't help. Gaining a lot of us 'fleas' with which to bite MS so they take notice requires co-ordinated and impassioned thought backed by effective communication of opinion and experience, not thousands of keyboard warriors 'freaking out'.

I guess what I'm saying is by all means let your experiences be heard but if we try not to come across as reactionary whingers then negative constructive feedback will make a difference.

Maybe I'm being a bit altruistic here. After all, this is the Internet, where rage and caffeine-fuelled apoplexy too often rule the roost.

The new Metro interface seems to rely even more on Search - just start typing in something and Windows 8 will find it for you. So it would be kinda nice if this actually worked! - it was broken in Vista and Win7 - so can we have it fixed for Win8. e.g. I have a file called xxxyyy.txt - I type in yyy to the Explorer search feature and it comes back with nothing - nada - zilch - zero! Useless!

I don't need to search because, just like in the real world, I remember where I put things!

In the real world we have networks, many users and shared folder...

Searching for network stored data isn't the same as searching for locally stored applications. I expect to do the first; the latter shouldn't be necessary.

In the real world, most of us work for "Joe's Auto Parts chain" or "Sally's Bookstores, Inc." We don't use smartphones for work, we don't text on business time and still retain a fax machine in several, if not all, of our offices. (I think I may have seen 2, at the most, 3 computers actually networked, other than the POS systems.) I think I am in the majority of the 78% of business' to continue using XP. My corporate bosses seem to frown on the possibility of one of our employees accessing another computer user's files. And... if Microsoft is really listening, they will seriously stop to consider all of the companies like ours who will refuse to purchase touch screens or software with silly little icons. Many of us are still using Office 2003 because we don't have the time, money or inclination to stop our operations to teach our employees how to navigate Office 7 and above's childish little "tiles.".